Moving Beyond the Firewall: Why Zero Trust is a People Problem, Not a Tech Fix
The cybersecurity industry has a persistent, costly misunderstanding: we treat security as a purely technical problem. We buy more tools, hire more engineers, and build bigger firewalls, yet the risk keeps rising. This tension between technical investment and organizational failure is at the heart of the Zero Trust movement.
The shift to "never trust, always verify" is not just an architectural change—it's a cultural one, demanding a clear delineation of roles, responsibilities, and accountability that extends far beyond the CISO's office.
The Problem of the Short-Tenured CISO
One of the most telling signs that security is not just a tech problem is the startling turnover in the top role. The average tenure for a Chief Information Security Officer (CISO) has been estimated at 26 months, significantly lower than the 5+ years seen in other C-suite roles. (Source: Twosense/Cybersecurity Ventures)
Why the "CISO rotation?" Because the CISO is often implicitly expected to solve a technical problem, but is then held accountable for failures caused by operational or business-level decisions.
As discussed in the episode, a technically-focused CISO who speaks in terms of "speeds and feeds" to the board will likely be seen as a failed technical manager when a breach occurs, rather than a leader who couldn't secure the necessary resources or operational alignment.
The Two Broken Assumptions of Enterprise Security
Zero Trust, at its core, fixes two fundamental—and now defunct—assumptions:
- The Perimeter Assumption: Believing that what is behind the firewall is magically safe.
- The Ownership Assumption: Believing that security is exclusively the security team's job.
The second assumption is the hardest to break. For a security strategy to succeed, accountability must be integrated into every function, from the CEO down to the line-of-business manager.
"Accountability is an intrinsic part of what I do. I am accountable for the outcomes, all of them, legal, financial, safety, good and bad. I own all those." — Episode Insight
If a business leader pushes a product out the door without maintenance funding, resulting in a system that can't be patched, they have created a security risk. If a finance leader fails to secure their financial transactions against phishing, that is a fraud risk they should own. True Zero Trust requires these leaders to own their slice of the risk and be empowered to address it.
The Power of Incentives and the Storyteller Skill
To bridge this gap between technical teams and the business, security leaders must transform into storytellers. They must translate complex vulnerabilities into the language of the business: risk, revenue, and resilience.
Furthermore, accountability must be enforced with organizational structure and incentives. When senior leaders' bonuses or compensation are tied to security metrics—like reducing a critical bug backlog—the priority signal cascades throughout the entire organization. When the leadership cares, the teams follow.
The move to Zero Trust is a fundamental transformation. It is about aligning the organizational structure, incentives, and communication strategies with a "verify everything" mindset. It's about moving from a culture of blame after an incident to a culture of accountability that prevents it.
To hear the full discussion on defining security roles across the organization (all 73+ of them), and the single piece of advice for modernizing your Zero Trust approach, listen to the latest episode of the Zero Trust Journey podcast.
Founder | Cybersecurity Architect | Helping Organizations Build Resilient, Compliant Security Programs
1moGreat insight — especially on the cultural shift. But I think the missing piece in most Zero Trust programs is how verification is actually defined and performed. We’ve spent years saying “never trust, always verify,” but we rarely ask: verify what, and how? That’s where the attestation layer becomes essential — systems that can produce Zero-Knowledge proofs of state through Endpoint State Detection and Enforcement (ESDE). It’s not about trust by policy anymore; it’s about cryptographic evidence that a device or workload is still in a known-good condition. Zero Trust sets the philosophy. The attestation layer makes it measurable. That’s how verification becomes more than a slogan — it becomes math.
Great!. Curious: which org-level incentive have you seen move behavior fastest—tying leader comp to security SLOs, or making risk acceptance a signed, time-boxed decision per business owner?
Internal Audit | SOX 404 Compliance | Internal Controls | Risk Assessment & Mitigation | Process Improvement & Growth
1moAgree! Tone at the top and company culture set the foundation, and compliance should be a shared goal across the organization.
Simplify and Clarify • Improve cybersecurity architecture and strategy • Align security to business and humans
1moThis was a great conversation! Y’all managed to get me to share most of all of my controversial security opinions! 😁